From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 16 17:36:07 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A677316A400 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 17:36:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0D213C458 for ; Wed, 16 May 2007 17:36:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 70372 invoked from network); 16 May 2007 16:54:40 -0000 Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([62.48.2.2]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 16 May 2007 16:54:40 -0000 Message-ID: <464B4103.4020505@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 19:36:03 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jack Vogel References: <2a41acea0705161030k40831aa5o168b5bc40fcf3352@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2a41acea0705161030k40831aa5o168b5bc40fcf3352@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net , FreeBSD Current Subject: Re: EM and TSO X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 17:36:07 -0000 Jack Vogel wrote: > I introduced a change yesterday that limited TSO to PCI Express > adapters, I did this more for avoidance rather than a bug fix, and > I'm not 100% sure its the right thing, so I thought I would poll > everyone, do you have a PCI-X adapter and are using TSO without > problems and wish to keep the support in? I'm using the dual-port PCI-X adapter and would like to keep using TSO on it. There are a lot of those adapters out there in servers. TSO is scheduled to be MFC'd really soon now and not having it work with em(4) on PCI-X would be quite limiting. -- Andre